What caused the Rokslide shift to smallest caliber and cartridges?

[Pharmseller]

Please correct my math if you can. If you’re happy shooting 243’s at elk by all means keep using them. If you’re a big fan of frangible bullets use them. I’ve only killed 20 elk & seen another 20 so not a statistically significant sample. 30+ deer isn’t like cull hunters with hundreds or thousands of animals to observe. In my limited experience a big 300 makes a noticeable difference in post shot behavior.

Putting the bullet in the right spot is the most important thing if it’s 85 or 300 grains. Most younger hunters want light rifles that they can’t shoot accurately with heavy recoil. It’s a legitimate choice to go smaller but it doesn’t change the laws of physics.

You are ahead of me on count but not by much, so our experience is basically the same.

I think you are conflating energy with energy transfer. If the bullet zips through the chest cavity without transferring energy there’s really no advantage to a larger cartridge.

For example, I shot a branch bull a few years ago with a 300 Wby Mag using 180 gr Partitions. Maybe 100 yards. Zipzip double lung and exit. The bull just casually turned his head and started walking. Zipzip, shot number two, similar placement. Slowed him down a bit but still standing. Shot number three in the shoulder (hated to do it, destruction) put him down. 300 Wby Mag, 180 gr Partitions.

I have a bunch of stories like this one where the bulls evidently hadn’t read the ballistics tables and simply shrugged off the “energy” of the bullet. Again, actual experience.

A bullet requires sufficient velocity to perform as designed and penetrate vital organs at distances the hunter plans to shoot. Anything more than that just makes a louder sound as it hits the ground on the other side of the animal.

To me, energy figures are worthless. I look at velocity as a function of performance windows and distance and plan accordingly.

But that’s just me. I don’t expect to change your mind and you won’t change mine.




P

 

[specneeds]

You need to take it down a notch or two

Sent from my SM-G996U using

You are ahead of me on count but not by much, so our experience is basically the same.

I think you are conflating energy with energy transfer. If the bullet zips through the chest cavity without transferring energy there’s really no advantage to a larger cartridge.

For example, I shot a branch bull a few years ago with a 300 Wby Mag using 180 gr Partitions. Maybe 100 yards. Zipzip double lung and exit. The bull just casually turned his head and started walking. Zipzip, shot number two, similar placement. Slowed him down a bit but still standing. Shot number three in the shoulder (hated to do it, destruction) put him down. 300 Wby Mag, 180 gr Partitions.

I have a bunch of stories like this one where the bulls evidently hadn’t read the ballistics tables and simply shrugged off the “energy” of the bullet. Again, actual experience.

A bullet requires sufficient velocity to perform as designed and penetrate vital organs at distances the hunter plans to shoot. Anything more than that just makes a louder sound as it hits the ground on the other side of the animal.

To me, energy figures are worthless. I look at velocity as a function of performance windows and distance and plan accordingly.

But that’s just me. I don’t expect to change your mind and you won’t change mine.




P

Your experience with partitions isn’t unique I had that happen with a cow elk & a 30-06 under 100 yards after turning her back from a run at about 250 with 2 in the chest. The day before an average sized mule deer went bang flop with the same load.

My preference was the 7mm 150 grain frangible Nosler ballistic tips for deer & elk after a 1 year experiment with Accubond 160’s. After a bad experience I switched to Barnes TTSX then 30 caliber 180 grain TTSX in the Weatherby. It has been very impressive- I had a cow do a backflip over a small cliff & wedge into a tree with a front of chest hit at 550 yards.

My 1976 Ruger 7mm is so accurate it’s hard for other rifles to get out of the safe during deer season. So 243, 25-06 , 6.5 Creedmoor as well as 30-06’s are left sitting as inferior tools in comparison. The largest deer I’ve seen killed at home was shot with a 243 by a novice Hunter who quit afterward because the sport was so easy. So back on point deer are not hard to kill with a 243 or similar.

I’ve seen a bull elk with 2 hammered lungs & a broken offside shoulder from a 300 Win wielded by a Marine sharpshooter walking toward the ranch boundary as if he had a sore hoof. So my thoughts on elk are more is better at least for me - hunting elk out of state once a year on public land.

 

[HingleMcCringleberry]

I’ve seen a bull elk with 2 hammered lungs & a broken offside shoulder from a 300 Win wielded by a Marine sharpshooter walking toward the ranch boundary as if he had a sore hoof. So my thoughts on elk are more is better at least for me - hunting elk out of state once a year on public land.

Case closed I guess

 

[Pharmseller]

Your experience with partitions isn’t unique I had that happen with a cow elk & a 30-06 under 100 yards after turning her back from a run at about 250 with 2 in the chest. The day before an average sized mule deer went bang flop with the same load.

My preference was the 7mm 150 grain frangible Nosler ballistic tips for deer & elk after a 1 year experiment with Accubond 160’s. After a bad experience I switched to Barnes TTSX then 30 caliber 180 grain TTSX in the Weatherby. It has been very impressive- I had a cow do a backflip over a small cliff & wedge into a tree with a front of chest hit at 550 yards.

My 1976 Ruger 7mm is so accurate it’s hard for other rifles to get out of the safe during deer season. So 243, 25-06 , 6.5 Creedmoor as well as 30-06’s are left sitting as inferior tools in comparison. The largest deer I’ve seen killed at home was shot with a 243 by a novice Hunter who quit afterward because the sport was so easy. So back on point deer are not hard to kill with a 243 or similar.

I’ve seen a bull elk with 2 hammered lungs & a broken offside shoulder from a 300 Win wielded by a Marine sharpshooter walking toward the ranch boundary as if he had a sore hoof. So my thoughts on elk are more is better at least for me - hunting elk out of state once a year on public land.

You didn’t address the energy argument.




P

 

[brhillman]

There definitely is a difference between the damage done by a big round and a small round given equal bullet expansion. But that's the point I believe is being made throughout threads like this one and the 223 thread.

People aren't choosing equal bullets in the small rounds and big rounds, people are typically choosing controlled expansion bullets for the big boomers which greatly reduce their wound channel. Between a big controlled expansion bullet and a small heavy for caliber match bullet, the playing field is leveled or actually favoring the smaller round.

If you were to shoot the same style bullet in a big magnum, something like a 195TMK from a 300 win mag, you get the huge destructive wounds like Form is showing where the whole rear quarters are blown out and the entire vitals are turned inside out.

So yes, bigger bullet = bigger wound when all other things are equal, but I don't think most people want that excessive destruction on an animal they're harvesting for food. Additionally, in my own experience, the same thought process that wants a magnum also wants high weight retention and potential for very deep penetration. So bonded or partition or mono "premium hunting bullets" are going to get chosen which make a much smaller wound.

So you're greatly reducing the wound that the magnum can create, while others are maximizing the wound a 223 can create, and you end up with equal killing ability.

Disclaimer: I'm early in my journey, I'm not speaking completely out of my own experience. But I have good reading comprehension and can see what's being present by guys like Form and I can see the breakdown in logic of the nay saying arguments.

Still trying to get all the way caught up on all the source material for these threads, but I’m amazed that this point seems to keep getting lost in all the bickering and “feelings” about what people think everyone ought to be pointing at animals. This post seems to capture the essence of it: the “trend” toward smaller calibers seems to really be about matching bullet construction and performance to caliber/cartridge choice to create appropriate wound channels to balance killing efficacy with meat loss. And now there’s a large body of data here that demonstrates that you can do that with smaller, lighter recoiling cartridges.

 

[SBR Sarge]

Well, I made it through this thread and the 223 thread. My thanks to all those who made constructive posts.

It was informative and it is costing me money.

While I don’t see myself hunting deer with any of my 5.56/223s, I feel compelled nonetheless to order a few boxes of Black Hills 5.56 77TMK loads.

They are in stock at Bone Frog Gun Club, as well as the 6.5CM 140gr TMKs someone asked about a dozen or so pages back.


Edit to add link….. https://www.bonefroggunclub.com/collections/in-stock?page=1

 

[specneeds]

If you could see these 2 gel blocks split in 1/2 next to each other in person I have no doubt you would agree that the 178 caused much more permanent damage.

The lighter colored portions of the red dye are temporary "stretch", the dark colored portion is permanent "crush" cavity.

How many ribs & shoulder bones do the bullets penetrate before they crush the gel?

 

[JGRaider]

If you had a "failed experiment" with 7mm 160 AB's you can chalk that up to user error, not the bullet. I've killed over 60 head of African game up through and including numerous wildebeest (tougher than any elk that ever walked the planet), oryx, kudu, and many smaller. I only "caught" a few bullets as the rest exited, this in spite of intentionally shooting through shoulder bone to take out the heart.

 

[CC55]

How many ribs & shoulder bones do the bullets penetrate before they crush the gel?

Here is the 106 tap in gel after going through two pieces of 20 gauge steel.

 

[specneeds]

Here is the 106 tap in gel after going through two pieces of 20 gauge steel.
View attachment 655084

Impressive but if you sandwich 3/8 plywood with the thin steel that would be closer to a rib consistency. But just the steel is more durable than the thickest hide or cartilage. That damage spike at 6” is nice. No exit hole but probably no tracking required on a deer.

Have you done anything to test deflection? I’ve seen it captured accidentally but not purposely in gel tests?

 

[HingleMcCringleberry]

Here is the 106 tap in gel after going through two pieces of 20 gauge steel.
View attachment 655084

I wonder if that has the required ft lbs of energy to kill something? (Sarcasm)

 

[MT_Wyatt]

If you had a "failed experiment" with 7mm 160 AB's you can chalk that up to user error, not the bullet. I've killed over 60 head of African game up through and including numerous wildebeest (tougher than any elk that ever walked the planet), oryx, kudu, and many smaller. I only "caught" a few bullets as the rest exited, this in spite of intentionally shooting through shoulder bone to take out the heart.

View attachment 655083

Cool post, thanks for sharing that!

 

[Formidilosus]

Impressive but if you sandwich 3/8 plywood with the thin steel that would be closer to a rib consistency.

Not even remotely close. A rib at rifle velocities is nothing to a bullet. Nor is the dreaded “shoulder” that’s all of a piece of cardboard.

Have you done anything to test deflection? I’ve seen it captured accidentally but not purposely in gel tests?

It’s done every single time in the FBI gel protocol.

 

[CC55]

Impressive but if you sandwich 3/8 plywood with the thin steel that would be closer to a rib consistency. But just the steel is more durable than the thickest hide or cartilage. That damage spike at 6” is nice. No exit hole but probably no tracking required on a deer.

Have you done anything to test deflection? I’ve seen it captured accidentally but not purposely in gel tests?

Yeah, it's nice to see it through some varied barriers. From what I've seen on elk/deer from the 140 ELDM up to 225 ELDM, the ribs and or scap don't stop much. The bone seems to actually help with even more shrapnel/fragments into the vitals. I don't really care about exits anymore since they usually tip over quick w/ lung soup, or they're getting another bullet since I can stay on target better with a small caliber.

That wasn't my testing, just pulled from Hornady's gel testing data. They also test into glass (FBI protocol) at a sig angle and it is much tougher on bullets than bone from what I understand.

 

[Jason Snyder]

Impressive but if you sandwich 3/8 plywood with the thin steel that would be closer to a rib consistency.

For realz? Maybe more like a few popsicle sticks glued together.

 

[Pharmseller]

If you had a "failed experiment" with 7mm 160 AB's you can chalk that up to user error, not the bullet. I've killed over 60 head of African game up through and including numerous wildebeest (tougher than any elk that ever walked the planet), oryx, kudu, and many smaller. I only "caught" a few bullets as the rest exited, this in spite of intentionally shooting through shoulder bone to take out the heart.

View attachment 655083

I read that post on 24hrcampfire many times.



P

 

[eoperator]

How many ribs & shoulder bones do the bullets penetrate before they crush the gel?

Zero

The 223 tread shows many deer-elk-pig-pronghorn-bear-moose, shoulders & ribs shattered with a 77g bullet if you want to take a look for reference.

 

[specneeds]

If you had a "failed experiment" with 7mm 160 AB's you can chalk that up to user error, not the bullet. I've killed over 60 head of African game up through and including numerous wildebeest (tougher than any elk that ever walked the planet), oryx, kudu, and many smaller. I only "caught" a few bullets as the rest exited, this in spite of intentionally shooting through shoulder bone to take out the heart.

View attachment 655083

I am too harsh with “fail” both the elk & deer I shot with them died but the young bull was 75 yards neck shot to avoid another bull behind his chest. The deer was on the move 2 bullets back of the chest zipped through & let him run quite a while - much less effective than NBT. But my big disappointment was accuracy. All the 150’s I’ve used in a few loads shoot less than 1/2” at 100 really amazing rifle. The 160’s were about 1.25” at best - didn’t matter that trip but was annoying. It doesn’t like 140’s either. So maybe the F should be a C- but they aren’t any good for that gun anyway. The Barnes 150s standard load now I think 62.5 grains of IMR 4350 and it’s back to super accurate with penetration.

 

[JGRaider]

Like I said......user error. Poor shot placement, poor reloading, etc ain't the bullet's fault.

 

[Towhee]

Modern cartridges/bullets are so good- why beat yourself up with recoil when you don't have too? Unless you have a suppressor.